Reference no: EM133735865

Question: Please respond to this post

In support of the felony murder rule, I concur with the legislative intent behind the policy. Assessing each person who causes and partakes in an unlawful killing to determine whether the killing was intentional or accidental, with or without malice, and adjusting our treatment of the person accordingly, the time it takes to tediously weigh all those factor has been effectively replaced by the felony murder rule. In comparison with the charge of an accessory, before or after the fact, to be charged with felony murder, a person has to play an substantial role in the criminal activity. When we examine the goals of the criminal justice system, the felony murder rule serves the intended purpose of deterrence. The rationale is the law is to prevent and punish, when required, criminal activity. The punishment is meant to deter others in our society from committing similar or even worse crimes. If there is a lesson to be learned it can be taught by punishing those who partake in criminal activity with others, even if they are not directly responsible the death.

A charge of felony murder requires a death that occurs in the commission of an inherently dangerous crime. This requires the criminal act of crimes such as arson, kidnapping, robbery, burglary, and rape. These are crimes that in laymen's terms, have a good chance of going bad, and possibly resulting in someone death. In a charge of felony murder, the accused must be guilty of the underlying felony, and the felony must be independent and not merge the act of killing. Therefore, the act of committing a felony assault can merge with the act of killing and prevent the use of the felony murder rule. The felony murder rules justification is that some crimes are so deadly that society wishes to prevent people from committing them at all. Thus, even if someone else caused the actual death, a person who engages in the dangerous crime may still be held accountable for the deadly results of that conduct. The rule as the legislature enacted states that if an individual commits or seeks to commit any of the listed felonies, they will be considered guilty of first degree murder for any homicides committed during that time. A defendant is typically only found guilty of murder if the prosecution can demonstrate that the defendant acted with the deliberate intent to kill or with a reckless disregard for human life.

Although established under the laws of England in 1716, all common law countries have abolished the felony murder doctrine except the US. The argument of constitutionality has come up in cases such as Edmund v. Florida, where the court ruled that the imposition of the death penalty under the felony murder rule when the defendant did not intentionally kill the victim constituted cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment.The controversy was also addressed in Tison v. Arizona, where the court ruled the death penalty may be imposed on someone who was a major participant in the underlying felony in a reckless manner. Since sentencing guidelines are intended to serve the purpose of deterrence, the public can stand to benefit from less collaborative criminals, scenarios involving multiple crimes, and minimize multiple defendants in being concert.